Re: The future of television
 

Even if you extended them until 2099 I don't reckon they would be commercially viable. :D

"Hyper local my arse" as Jim Royle would say!

Re: The future of television
 

I was just trying to find a shorthand way of describing what they are. But fair enough, you can’t polish a 💩

Re: The future of television
 

At the end of the day does it really matter how TV is delivered.

Re: The future of television
 

The discussion isn't really about how it's delivered (DTT, IPTV, 5G, beamed directly to your brain by the COVID vaccine, or whatever ), it centres more on whether it will be a combination of Scheduled Programming and Streaming, or, just Streaming...

Re: The future of television
 

More bad news for loathers of linear. In essence, a cheap way to make a little of dosh out of old content.
https://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2023...ls-on-freevee/

Re: The future of television
 

That is more likely the US version which is quite different and (as usual for US) much bigger than the UK offering.

Re: The future of television
 

Probably true, but besides the point.

The notable fact here is that a major film and TV studio is using platforms designed for on-demand TV to launch *scheduled* broadcast services. This demonstrates the point many of us have been making here for years, namely that these services are seen as convenient for consumers and cost-effective for providers.

Re: The future of television
 

If it’s like Pluto TV, there is a live TV or on demand option available.

Re: The future of television
 

The older generation are now taking to the streaming habit in greater numbers, according to Ofcom.

https://www.broadbandtvnews.com/2023...-to-streaming/

[EXTRACT]

The UK regulator Ofcom says it has seen a steep decline in mass audience moments with fewer numbers tuning into the traditional linear channels.

According to today’s Media Nations Report, there is for the first-time evidence of a significant decline in broadcast TV viewing among older audiences. Over-64s watched 8% less broadcast TV in 2022 than in 2021 and viewing was 6% lower than in 2019 (the last pre-pandemic year).

Re: The future of television
 

Phew, I was almost worried.

Re: The future of television
 

Who are these maniacs who plan their daily schedule around linear TV scheduling?

I regularly get home from work and watch News at Six anytime between 7pm and 8pm while making dinner.

I do not have cable TV or a TV aerial in the house so rely on the broadcasters web platforms.

Freely cannot come soon enough.

Re: The future of television
 

I’m not sure very many people plan their evenings around scheduled TV … home video recorders have been a thing for 40 years now. I do like to see the news at 10 though … sort of helps me wind down for bedtime. :D

You’re right about Freely though, navigating through multiple broadcaster apps is a pain if all you want to do is see what they have scheduled. I still refer to the Freesat app on my iPad for that - it has a full 8 day forward EPG, and an 8 day retrospective guide so you can see what you missed and therefore what’s likely to be on the broadcasters apps.

Re: The future of television
 

Well I certainly dont, since I work evenings. ;)

I watch most of mine between midnight and 3am (downloaded copies).
I do watch some on Saturday/Sunday evenings (unless I'm at the cinema).

Re: The future of television
 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/tech/ee-tv-...rival-31220273

Re: The future of television
 

It’ll never take off ;)

Re: The future of television
 

I think this is a rebranded BT TV box as they will be prioritising the EE brand for consumers and the BT one for organisations.

Re: The future of television
 

I assume you are being humourous.

Re: The future of television
 

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.ph...purchases.html

Oh dear, oh dear. Another success of the streaming future.

Re: The future of television
 

Purchasing digital content that remains on the host seems stupid to me. Renting is one thing but buying not a chance.

Re: The future of television
 

Sadly they don’t always give you a rental option. In fact these days it seems the rental option appears on the major services (Apple, Prime) between 4-8 months post theatrical release, pretty much in the time frame you would once have gone to PPV on Sky or VM, and after that it vanishes and the title becomes purchase only.

I wanted to watch M3gan with my youngest, who is a big horror movie fan but wasn’t quite 15 when it came out in the cinema. It eventually appeared to rent and to buy but by the time we had a Sunday afternoon free to actually watch it together the rental option had gone. So I had to purchase. I have purchased only once or twice in the past and would only ever do so via Apple or Prime because content delivery is at the heart of their business models. I’d never rely on any service delivered by an ISP other than the actual bandwidth itself.

Re: The future of television
 

I've purchased loads of stuff on Sky and Amazon.

Admittedly, with Sky it was mainly purchasing the DVD and getting the digital copy too.

It comes in handy when going on holiday, as you can download the movies to you Ipads, essential on short haul flights when there's no inflight entertainment and also if the Wifi is too dodgy or slow to allow streaming.

Re: The future of television
 

I am still in the record and watch when I feel like it school only stream if the recording has failed. Only watch " news" live , however that is a 24 HR service so guess it doesn't count

Re: The future of television
 

l will purchase digital content from Amazon but not with any others..

Re: The future of television
 

You only need to look at Netflix , Netflix Standard with ads is £4.99 they have withdrawn the standard one screen adfree option and the next option is ad free at £10.99 for two screens with the Premium going to £17.99 a month for ad free and 4 screens.

Basically Netflix is now saying we’ll gladly let you have an ad free experience but if so you’re going to pay a decent amount for that luxury.

Many of the analysts have said Netflix can easily start to make $10 on the ad tier add that to the money they are already charging for the subscription and you can already see why they are pushing prices for the other tiers higher.

Re: The future of television
 

All makes the BBC look incredibly good value.

Re: The future of television
 

how many new series do the BBC make every year? doubt it is many compared to Netflix or Prime for that matter. I imagine there are more none English language movies/TV shows dubbed in English on Netflix every months than BBC produce in a year

Re: The future of television
 

I think it depends on what you watch. The BBC output is only a small part of my own viewing experience, and my wife now watches it even less than me.

They have fewer dramas these days, their documentaries have been dumbed down, the comedies are banal and their news reporting is often biased.

It’s a shame, because we used to watch the BBC more than any other channel.

Re: The future of television
 

Quality not quantity OB. We're not all streaming 24/7 ;)

Fewer dramas, maybe true. But a Govt decision ( vendetta) to freeze the licence fee for years.

Biased news? Depends where you're starting from but they seem to get equal complaints from either side so probably about right. Is GB news unbiased in your opinion ?

Re: The future of television
 

So, unbiased? The hospital in the Gaza strip was bombed by Isreal? Only due a report from Hamas without fact checking. Turns out the hospital wasn't bombed but an errant Hamas missile hit the car park. Yep defintely unbiased!

For the record: Although I agree that Isreal, just like any other country has the right to respond to attacks does not mean I agree with the Isreali methods. I also do not agree with Hamas using Palastinian people as human shields.

Re: The future of television
 

It was reported that way by almost every news outlet going at the time. Channel 4 and the New York Times are still questioning what we are being told by “intelligence services”.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/24/w...mas-video.html

I think it’s a stretch to imply that bias was the cause of the original reporting - rather than it was the most credible explanation based on the facts available and eyewitness reports at that time.

And for the record: my sole point of this post isn’t who did it but the reasonableness of the initial reporting in a fast moving and difficult environment.

Re: The future of television
 

So its the intelligence services fault? They sould have known a Hamas missile would misfire and explode in a Hosplital car park?!
The most credible information based of facts would be the fact that a hospital had not been bombed but an explosion happened in the car park, instead the BBC followed all the other media and relyed on a press release from Hamas only.

The hospital wasn't bombed and there weren't 300 causalties that is a FACT!
Instead of doing due dilligence on reporting they juat ran with what Hamas said (as did many others). Do you not think that show a bias.

Made good clickbait though.

I also think Russia is behind this to divert attention away from Ukraine. It stinls of it!!!

Re: The future of television
 

I’m unsure there are any facts to be had here but I’m certain it’s not the thread for it.

I’m unconvinced that the BBC deliberately misrepresented what they - and everyone else - were hearing on the ground, nor am I convinced by Israel and its allies saying they have proof and to trust them :rofl: .

Re: The future of television
 

It really doesnt.

Even the (almost only) programme on the BBC I watch is now joint funded by a streamer (Doctor Who).

Re: The future of television
 

The BBC thinks it’s better than the rest, but this incident proves that to be wrong. Even I was suspicious about that claim from the start. What were the BBC thinking?

Re: The future of television
 

On what do you base your assertion that "The BBC thinks it’s better than the rest"?

Re: The future of television
 

I don’t think they deliberately misrepresented the facts. They just assumed it must have been Israel as the Corporation appears to be biased towards the Palestinians. So when the Palestinians claimed the hospital was blown up by Israel, the Beeb gave that claim credence without exercising any caution about the veracity of the claim.

Most people contributing to this thread thought likewise.

---------- Post added at 10:25 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------

https://advanced-television.com/2023...io-protection/

[EXTRACT]

A report published by over-60s advocacy group Silver Voices has revealed the extent of the British public’s support for the protection of broadcast TV and radio for the long-term.

According to the Safeguarding Universality: The Future of Broadcast TV and Radio report’s findings, over 80 per cent of respondents believe broadcast TV and radio should be protected well beyond 2040 – to at least 2051, with some going further and calling for them to be protected until 2079. This is far in advance of the UK Government’s current commitment to protect these services until 2034.



I can’t see this getting international acceptance due to the pressure to better utilising the bandwidth currently used to carry TV signals. I think the government needs to concentrate more on enabling all households to receive the basic internet speeds required for streaming and make it easier for them to access programmes. It can’t be beyond the wit of man.

Re: The future of television
 

I'm not sure "most" people in the thread agree with your contention that the BBC were biased, however to move onto the second part of your post what pressure to re-use the bandwidth?

5G frequencies the demand is 3.5-7Ghz, 6G is looking at 100-300Ghz. There's almost zero demand for sub 700 MHz at any scale in this country or any other.

Re: The future of television
 

Re: The future of television
 

Some countries want to switch off terrestrial broadcasting, and if a majority at the 2023 conference agree, we will have to comply with that.

I believe the issue relating to 5G is concerned with interference from terrestrial TV signals.

However, the public reaction to any such proposal to switch off terrestrial TV may dissuade the Conference members from going down that route.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/over-20000...save-freeview/

[EXTRACT]

Delegates at the World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-23) will make binding decisions on whether frequencies currently used for terrestrial TV in the UK and Europe must be surrendered for use by mobile network operators. In the UK, this affects Freeview, in the Republic of Ireland, Saorview.

Re: The future of television
 

Helpfully, the European Broadcast Union and African Telecommunications Union have both agreed on a no-change position for WRC-23. The chances of any meaningful change happening in Europe are virtually zero.

https://tech.ebu.ch/news/2023/08/afr...band-at-wrc-23.

There's no evidence that 5G coverage would be improved by farming off even more of the bandwidth below 700 MHz. The limitation is the lack of masts using the existing frequency allocation.

As Governments pivot towards satellite broadband as the answer for rural connectivity issues the demand to reallocate these frequencies will be further reduced as we hit the 2030s.

Re: The future of television
 

This article shows you that terrestrial broadcasting after 2035 is unlikely.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2023/decision-t...e-has-arrived/

[EXTRACT]

At the moment, Freeview frequencies are only secure until 2030. But administrations across Europe, including Ofcom in the UK, have been pushing for no change – keeping the status quo.

However, that may only guarantee ongoing use of frequencies for another four years, as the decision would be revisited at the next World Radiocommunications Conference in 2027.

Decision-makers in the UK hope that an extra four years will be enough time to get viewers switched from terrestrial to streaming services. Key to that assumption is Freely – the recently announced streaming replacement from the operator of the Freeview and Freesat platforms.

Re: The future of television
 

There’s nothing in that article but confirming they are kicking the can down the road.

“Hope”

Re: The future of television
 

UK decision makers just need the extra four years. I think they will get that, but no more.

Re: The future of television
 

Re: The future of television
 

No, it shows that a decision on reserving spectrum has been deferred.

As it happens I agree, the UK authorities most likely do want to call an end to terrestrial broadcast at some point. To be honest the ideal time to have done it was when we went digital. A free broadcast service standardised on Freesat would have avoided all these years of fiddling around trying to fit a quart in a pint pot. DTT has never, and will never, have the bandwidth satellite does and can never provide a full range of HD channels across the board. Freeview is a messy compromise and we only have it thanks to a combination of inertia and poor planning.

Having said all that, note also the move by the UK’s PSBs to launch ‘Freely’ next year …

https://inews.co.uk/news/freely-new-...o=most_popular

… as they finally acknowledge that to truly embed IP delivery of their content they are going to have to show people that their broadcast schedules are still available, even if they access content via their internet connection rather than an aerial or a dish.

If we end up with a fully IP delivered TV service in the next 10 years (and that’s still unlikely, given the pace of the super-fast broadband rollout in those famously ‘hard to reach’ areas) they’re only going to achieve it by making it look like Freeview. Plus ca change, as some foreigner or other once said.

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, that seems to be the way things are going. The government is going to be very careful about how this change will be managed and a completely different look and feel will not be welcomed by some sections of society, particularly the elderly.

Instead of the Big Bang that I still believe most of the broadcasters would prefer, change is going to have to happen in smaller doses so that all members of society can get used to the new way of doing things. The government will make sure of that, I have no doubt.

Re: The future of television
 

The Government that will be out on it’s ear next year?

Re: The future of television
 

I wouldn’t have thought Labour would come to a different view if in power, do you?

Re: The future of television
 

Re: The future of television
 

Are you minded to agree with the Scots Tory? :D

He does have a point, and I think it is a far deeper problem that is not confined to the rural ‘not spots’. We often have 3 or 4 TV shows streaming at once in our house. No problem at all on our 900Mb fibre - which is why we eventually decided not to even bother having a dish installed on our new house and have stuck with accessing everything over IP - but an 80Mb FTTC line would struggle with that, if there was any local contention at all. Radio waves do not suffer contention no matter how many people in the street are receiving them. There is a reason why old fashioned, one-to-many broadcast systems are going nowhere fast. They are super resilient and they are going to be the only reliable way of receiving TV in multi-screen households for many years to come.

I hope your right Chris... We dont wanna lose what we still have!! (Which isnt much :()

Re: The future of television
 

:D

I thought it’d appeal to OB in a way I couldn’t.

I agree with all of the rest of your post. Plus of course those that don’t want/need internet connections at home.

I appreciate it’s a small number. But all of these small numbers add up to a business case for maintaining broadcast television as is in some form.

Re: The future of television
 

Yup, broadband that is good enough isn't available to enough homes let alone chosen by them.

And even then it's ridiculous how much resources are needed by something new to offer what old technology can do without breaking sweat.

Even when they do move on to new tech 5G Broadcast makes much more sense than a standard IP delivered solution. More efficient, because of the broadcast element.

Re: The future of television
 

I think i"d still put up my satellite dish as a fall back if I were in your position.

I have to use the Internet when Virgin TV goes down and, whilst it is do-able, I find it to be a right faff.

Re: The future of television
 

It isn’t as quick as flipping channels but if you have a TV that handles apps well it is perfectly functional once you get used to it. We have a BT Halo internet connection so if the fibre goes down the 4G backup cuts in automatically. To the best of my knowledge that has never happened, although the fibre modem router and the 4G receiver are hiding under the stairs so I’d probably take a while to notice.

We have never really been multi-channel TV fans in our house and find everything we need on the main public service broadcasters, whose apps all give easy access to their broadcast stream, and the main streaming services.

Re: The future of television
 

If you have an aerial then the new Freeview Freely box might be an option to make things even easier.

If you aren't going to use your Freesat HD box then now would be a good time to sell it as the old SD boxes won't get any BBC channels from January & it's looking likely that Sky are intending to move their SD channels to S2 too, so I imagine that all the others will follow suit to cut costs, meaning that there will be a market for the remaining 2% who still have SD satellite boxes. Sky subscribers can get a free upgrade, but only vulnerable Freesat customers can get help with the cost

Former Sky subscribers, non vulnerable Freesat customers and those with generic satellite STB"s will shortly be on the lookout for an HD box if theirs is SD.

Re: The future of television
 

There is neither a terrestrial aerial nor a satellite dish on our house - it’s a new build. The builder put a wall plate in the lounge and ran cables into the loft but getting an aerial and or dish was up to us. We had intended to do so, until we lived with super-fast IP service for a few weeks, then it didn’t seem so important anymore.

Re: The future of television
 

Although it's covered in the sports thread within the cable TV section I guess it's worth an acknowledgement here that once again Sky are in the box seat once again should TV undergo any signifiant transition to new technologies.

Premier League rights are what developed the satellite market in the UK at all, Sky led the transition to digital television moving households onto their digital platform. Now the breadth of their products will once again be at the forefront as television diverges across the full range of platforms available. Only Sky will be offering products tailored to everyone's needs across the length and breadth of the UK.

For all the bluster around streaming services they remained nowhere to be seen in the auction and will remain bit part players in pure revenue terms in the market in the UK for the foreseeable.

Re: The future of television
 

https://rxtvinfo.com/2024/timeline-o...-satellite-tv/

[EXTRACT]

TV is changing: Freeview may now only have ten years left in its current form, with the main free-to-air broadcasters clubbing together to launch a replacement online service.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2024/how-pay-tv...of-big-change/

[EXTRACT]

The UK faces two years of momentous change for pay TV and premium streaming, as three US media giants make decisions that will have big implications for subscribers.

Current Warner Bros Discovery (WBD) deal with Sky covering HBO content will finally cease at the end of next year.

WBD then free to launch full version of Max in the UK, but only has just over 2 1/2 years to take full control of TNT/Eurosport UK joint venture
Paramount and WBD mull a possible tie-up, which could leave Comcast-owned Sky out in the cold.

Linear channels under threat of closure as advertising downturn continues and businesses push streaming.

All in the name of progress.

Re: The future of television
 

“Sky out in the cold” selling Premiership games all the way to the 2030s leaving everyone in their wake.

The multiple uses of “if” and “may” reminds me of the same stuff I’ve been reading for the past decade, and I fully expect to be reading well into the next one.m

All the streamers are scrambling for their very existence as they struggle to monetise non-premium content in an environment where consumers are feeling ever increasingly squeezed for their disposable income.

Amazon have ads, Netflix have ads. The low cost streaming future remains unfulfilled.

Re: The future of television
 

Have used streaming a lot in the last week and yes it works but it is a pain to use, needs work . Of the few I used itv x is the worse. Netflix the best but that just a old man's opinion:rolleyes:

Re: The future of television
 

Yes, it’s significantly less functional than regular channel hopping and that creates friction which mitigates against a full transition to IP based TV - as many of us here have been saying for years in the face of breathless futurology from certain other posters …

Re: The future of television
 

It's a real pain just to get to I player for the news channel so many hoops to jump through, at the moment my TV defaults to cnn so that's not too bad,.still working out how to remove apps I will never look at, getting there slowly .Used to default to some vague children's channel but at least that has gone:dozey:

Re: The future of television
 

I don’t know, Chris, you seem to be warming to streaming judging by your recent posts.

It’s just a question of getting used to it, and it will almost certainly improve with time.

I use apps, recordings and bookmarks all the time now, and frankly it presents no problem at all. In fact, I get to the content I want just as quickly or quicker.

Re: The future of television
 

Quicker than what ?

Re: The future of television
 

Scheduled TV, of course. On demand is immediate. You have to wait until your desired content is aired on linear TV.

Re: The future of television
 

You do have to wait for the show to be made available to watch.

Re: The future of television
 

You have to wait for some streamed content too…

Re: The future of television
 

Just setting it up to watch , gives enough time to get a coffee:D

Re: The future of television
 

The thing OB persistently misses is that none of us are somehow ideologically in favour of linear television - we simply recognise the advantages of it.

Sitting on streaming apps for example switching between live Champions League games, or overseas apps live Premiership games, it's nowhere near as convenient as broadcast content on a set top box with EPG numbers. That's just within the same platform. Heaven forbid you want to check the score on a Sky football league game while watching the TNT game on their app.

Re: The future of television
 

Clearly, although some programmes are available before they are shown on live TV - and often you can see the complete box set before the programme is scheduled on a TV channel.

The thing is, you can watch the programme you choose at a time convenient to you, not simply at the scheduled time, and you don’t need to go to the bother of recording it first.

---------- Post added at 23:00 ---------- Previous post was at 22:58 ----------

I’ve acknowledged on many occasions that it’s different for sports viewers.

Re: The future of television
 

TV viewing in our living room, by hours watched, is about 50/50 on any given day in terms of as-broadcast v streaming (whether catch-up or online only). It has been that way in our house for the last 5 or 6 years. In our case it’s because we have a greater than average consumption of the sort of sci-fi and fantasy the PSB channels really can’t be bothered doing any more. Plenty of my real-world friends and family don’t consume nearly as much Netflix/Prime/etc.

Our viewing is entirely over IP but that’s entirely because our house has no aerial and the cost and faff of getting one fitted. I would still rather watch as-broadcast TV via a Freesat box than over IP. Channel hopping via apps is an absolute pain in the neck and many FTA channels just aren’t available at all.

It’s a loss of utility that I can live with, because in absolute terms we don’t watch a vast amount of TV and the lack of an aerial, and the associated inconvenience of navigating streaming/catch-up apps, has the decent side effect of making us watch fewer hours per week than we did maybe 10 years ago. The TV isn’t ever on in the background any more. Viewing is a deliberate choice, and therefore something we do less.

But I doubt advertisers and subscription salesmen are happy with that notion, and if by “getting used to it”, you mean you think the viewing public should learn to be satisfied with less, then you are the Emperor Ming and I claim my £5.

Re: The future of television
 

Thats exactly the same with streaming. :erm:

---------- Post added at 23:42 ---------- Previous post was at 23:41 ----------

You have to wait for all streamed content, sometimes while you're watching it ...

Re: The future of television
 

That’ll be the sports viewers who pay billions a year for pay-tv services. They aren’t some niche minority, OB. They’ve been propping up the “general entertainment” subscription market around the world for decades.

Re: The future of television
 

Further evidence that the TV channels arenot going to survive for much longer.

Some will try to deny it, Canute-like, but the reality is becoming difficult to ignore.

Some channels will close, others will have IP channels and streaming in a transitional period before going streaming only.

https://rxtvinfo.com/2024/freesat-be...changes-ahead/

[EXTRACT]

Broadcasters can save money by ditching traditional means of distributing their channels. Switching to IP-only pushes some of the cost of distributing content to internet service providers and indeed the consumer. It also allows broadcasters to put channels behind a registration wall, so they can commercially monetise user information.

While big channels like BBC One and ITV1 can still command large audiences via traditional platforms, the shift to streaming is already disproportionately affecting smaller and niche channels.

Re: The future of television
 

If Challenge+1 can survive, anyone can.

Re: The future of television
 

What is your take on this, then, jfman? If this becomes the norm, it will please people like you (if it’s even possible to please you) because the consumer would only have to subscribe to one streamer to access all the sports.

It could catch on!

https://advanced-television.com/2024...orts-platform/

. ESPN, a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company, Fox and Warner Bros Discovery have agreed principal terms to form a new Joint Venture (JV) to build a platform to house a streaming sports service in the US.

The platform will bring together the companies’ portfolios of sports networks, certain direct-to-consumer (DTC) sports services and sports rights – including content from all the major professional sports leagues and college sports. The formation of the pay service is subject to the negotiation of definitive agreements amongst the parties. The offering, scheduled to launch inautumn 2024, would be made available directly to consumers via a new app. Subscribers would also have the ability to bundle the product, including with Disney+, Hulu and/or Max.

Re: The future of television
 

Nothing in that articles forecasts the end of TV channels, just changing the method of delivery

Re: The future of television
 

Sport is streamed all the time, OB.

Sky have been doing it for the best part of twenty years. The issue - that you seem to have missed - is that "deep pockets" streamers have challenges competing with incumbents in a well established market (pay-tv). Streaming in itself isn't a new market, merely a subset of an existing one.

You seem to have missed off this part:-

Nothing indicates this will replace existing offerings, rather the proposal is to complement them.

Re: The future of television
 

So 9 channels Ive never even heard of have dropped from a system I've never used. Ok.

The only thing in that article that remotely bothers me is the loss of Sky Satellite.
Sky Stream is not a suitable replacement unless they build in a recording or download system.
The mangled method they use atm is just bad, not to mention my TV still works when the internet fails.

Re: The future of television
 

Nothing in your post is disputed. But what I said over 9 years ago still stands as far as I am concerned. The linear and streamed versions of channels will exist side by side for a while, but it is most likely to be a transitional arrangement, not a permanent one (unless there is government intervention).

The last paragraph of my link is a clue:

While big channels like BBC One and ITV1 can still command large audiences via traditional platforms, the shift to streaming is already disproportionately affecting smaller and niche channels.

---------- Post added at 08:26 ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 ----------

What I said was that the idea of making a package of sports available on different platforms could catch on. It's one way of reducing the cost to companies of providing sports content, and consumers pay less too because they are not forced to subscribe to more than one streamer to watch their favourite content.

---------- Post added at 08:28 ---------- Previous post was at 08:26 ----------

More worrying for you if this is the beginning of a trend, though, isn't it?

Re: The future of television
 

Why would it catch on? Anyone who wants sports can get it off Sky. Sky monetise it successfully.

Those with the begging bowl out for paltry rights can aggregate it as much as they wish it doesn’t add up to a viable platform.

Re: The future of television
 

You were the one opining how expensive it was to have the streamers taking over sport. You know as well as I do, this trend will continue, but what this arrangement in the US shows is that there are opportunities to reduce these potential costs both for the streamers (through sharing the burden) and to the consumer (by making those sports available on multiple streamers).

You are still in denial over TV channels disappearing, aren’t you? And Sky may not always be hogging all the rights.

Re: The future of television
 

You do realise the the streamers "reducing potential costs by sharing the burden" would be a cartel, which is illegal?

Re: The future of television
 

The only user in denial here is you, OB.

Sky aren’t “hogging” all the rights - they’re bidding (like everyone else) in the open marketplace and monetising those rights from end users. Something that a “streamer” has been unable to do on any meaningful level for sports rights.

Your contention that they will have to break the law - as Hugh points out above - to make a return on sports rights speaks volumes as to the challenge.

Sky of course monetise their rights through streaming in addition to their own platform, and retailing through third parties such as Virgin Media. The market is well developed.

Re: The future of television
 

I don’t think so, and the article this subject links to does not mention such a thing.

Why is this any different from Sky making their channels available to other providers such as Virgin? How is it different from multiple studios being involved in the making of one film?

The costs would be shared because several providers form a partnership and share both the costs and the profits, and consumers benefit by having to pay less in subscriptions. Everybody wins.

---------- Post added at 17:25 ---------- Previous post was at 17:21 ----------

No, jfman. You are the one in denial here. So much so that you frequently resort to this sort of pedantry to try and make a point which we all know is becoming harder to argue as time goes on.

Despite the argument you and Hugh are making that it is against the law, the arrangement is already happening!

Re: The future of television
 

The article didn't mention it - you did.

The difference is between reselling and clubbing together to agree/reduce the amounts bid for the sports rights ("reduce these potential costs both for the streamers") - two different things….

https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/content/what-cartel

Re: The future of television
 

The article said it would be a joint venture. Obviously they would operate that within the law, which is not the most difficult thing to achieve. After all, Netflix and all the popular streamers are available through Sky, Virgin, Roku, Talk Talk, Amazon - so I say again, how is this any different?

I’m observing what is going on, not giving you a legal justification.How precisely this arrangement will work within legal constraints is a matter for the companies themselves to iron out. Perhaps you might like to offer them chapter and verse as to why you are suggesting they can’t do it…:rolleyes:

Re: The future of television
 

Consumers don’t pay less if content is bundled together. Indeed, they end up paying for the entire bundle including the content they don’t watch. Wasn’t that supposed to be a benefit of streaming to stop that?

There is nothing pedantic about introducing your fanciful posts to reality. It’s very easy to argue that no streamer has a business model for sports rights in the UK, indeed as every auction passes and rights sell for less in real terms than last time it’s obvious.

Re: The future of television
 

As I said very clearly, this arrangement is being introduced in the US, not the UK. However, I don’t see that as an immovable barrier.

The way I would assume this would work is that a group of companies get together to form a joint venture, which then bids for the rights to various sports. The rights they achieve are then made available to various other streamers and TV channels to provide access through subscriptions.

You are making too many assumptions here when you talk about bundling. There is no reason why streamers cannot separate out the main sporting events (football, tennis, horse racing, etc) and charge according to the sports the subscriber wants to watch.

Re: The future of television
 

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bi...133025822.html

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Re: The future of television
 

Glad you find that funny, but I see nothing wrong with that. Sport will always be linear because it's live. You may be making too much of that word 'channel' but I won't spoil your evening. :rolleyes:

Re: The future of television
 

All these bundled services for a consolidated price should have a ‘snappy" name.

How about "Cable+"? ;)

Re: The future of television
 

It’s quite clear that it will be offering content as both linear channels and on demand. Much like Sky, or Virgin Media, or Peacock in the US.

I, of course, see this as natural as it accommodates all user preferences.

Some services do stream live sports on their apps outside of linear channels so it’s a conscious choice to present content to consumers in this way.

Re: The future of television
 

Well, so what? Anyone would think this was 2035! 🤭:rofl:

Re: The future of television
 

If you can’t see the obvious contradiction between streaming being “the future” and some of the biggest names in broadcasting maintaining a linear presence on their own yet-to-launch app then I can’t help you.

Re: The future of television
 

Do you not understand the need for transitional periods?

Never mind, the future will take care of itself.

Re: The future of television
 

Why do they need a transitional period? This is the transition from broadcast to IP. If not now, when?

Time to let streaming stand in its own two feet and let the viewer decide with their wallet.

Re: The future of television
 

Great idea, the TV License fee could be scrapped and the BBC stand on its own 2 feet. Let the viewer decide.

I'm behind this 100%.

Re: The future of television
 

The politicians will never cull the state propaganda machine.